For a second I thought that said Fairyness, could you imagine the fairy godmother coming down and giving us world peace?
Actually we are in ugonda, somalia, south africa and a couple other countries... mostly the ones with diamond mines. So yes we try to impose our will everywhere. We just try to make them think we aren't controlling them so they won't get pissed off.
Agreed
They do care about Africa:
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/congo.htm
There are critics to this book but here is more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man
Interesting article, it appears I was wrong...America loves to meddle in Africa too...
I think that USA meddle with all countries that have one of their big companies representation in and where all those companies see profit in. USA is military superpower because its economic superpower. And all those big companies .... they want to get even bigger and they do support and donate money for election campaigns and they do bribe. So far nobody gave anything for free and all those millions aren't for free as well.
Plus there is lobbying and I bet there is also if you do not help us we wont be able to keep that factory, offices .... open and so and so many people will loose their jobs....
And Obama repeatedly criticises Britain over a company that has more American shareholders than British ones.
However, he informs us that it isn't because he hates the British...
So is he just saying this because he needs a scapegoat?
Anyway, his popularity seems to be fading, he can't pass anything through congress, and now he's pulling a Hitler and finding scapegoats.
Anyways, God save the USA! Let's hope Obama starts getting results.
You are talking about BP and oil spill???? Well he sort of has to.
They made a mess out there and America and probably whole world will be paying huge price for if for a very long time. Western society its too money orientated and thats why it will be our downfall. Money is our GOD.
You apparently do not understand the word Imperialism. Again, I would ask you where are the imperialistic territories of the US? I want to visit them (and if still in doubt about the definition of Imperialism, I would suggest dictionary.com, or perhaps a hard back copy of Websters).
He doesn't need to blame other countries. He can simply blame BP. Of course, then people will vote him out, but I'm pretty sure that that will happen anyway now that he isn't the saviour of the world everybody thought he would be
Well I guess there needs to be a word for a country that economically and militarily meddles with other countries to secure assets but doesn't plant the flag.
does the word America work??
Its not a scapegoat .. they are the ones responsible... Its not like obama blew up the well. Plus if our gov't takes it over then it will be our tax dollars paying for it. he just needs to make sure that the people who did the inspection(or failure to do so) see fines and jailtime. Same for Haliburton which supplied the subpar concrete.
Well, Obama should start with the Minerals Management Service then since I've heard they were real cozy with the various oil companies and had lax policies and inspections as a result.
You probably are living in the imperialistic territories of the US. The native Americans were conquered and subjugated by the dominant anglo-saxon culture. That is, by definition imperialistic.
No, Britain as a country isn't responsible. BP isn't a nationalised company, nor is it even called British Petroleum. Obama needs someone to blame, just a shame it's a country, not the companies involved. Of course, he couldn't risk BP stopping selling to him, so...
I will go along with that. Perhaps the fact that our language comes from England, which until the 19th century was extremely imperialistic, is now causing a problem. I believe the term coined during the cold war was "Sphere of influence", and that is more accurate of the state of the world post WWII.
It is no longer a realistic ambition for a country to control the world through military might. Instead, the world will be taken over with money.
You are probably living in the imperialistic area of England, where the native Picts and Celts were conquered by Anglos, Saxons and Normans.
If you go back far enough, I am sure you can claim that we are all imperialists as we conquered Dinosaurs. However, there comes a time to be realistic in that America is not occupying America. And the natives of this land are living here as part of the country. That the dominant culture comes from elsewhere is nothing new. Look at Latin and South America. However that does not make Mexico or Brazil imperialistic.
That's what you think!
But anyway, people say that Iraq and Afghanistan are being subjected to the brutal grip of American imperialism, but look at the alternatives. Even if America and the rest of NATO only stepped in to take oil, it beats being under a dictator (Saddam Hussein) or the Taliban and their perversion of Shariah Law.
Look at the Suet Valley (I think that's how you spell it) where the Taliban took over. Liberation began after reports of things such as a 17-year-old woman being whipped half to death for not marrying someone. There were reports of Taliban sympathisers being hanged in villages by the inhabitants after the Valley was cleared of Taliban. Does that make you think of people who have been conquered, or have been liberated?
I meant BP not Britain. Obama has never said that Britain is responsible either. Some people in american news have said it though and I agree that it is wrong.. But BP is British Petroleum.. The Beyond Petroleum thing was a marketing slogan.
Also we gave the same taliban leaders the country (Afghanistan) back when no one else stood up to take the reigns. Looks like america is staying there for other reasons too since we found lots of minerals under there. Of course that report was done in 2007 and just came to light.
The Taliban don't run the country. You may be thinking of the Muhajideen (or however it's spelt) who fought the Soviets. They are the Northern Tribes of Afghanistan. The majority of the Taliban isn't even Afghan.
Ok, I confess! Mexico and Brazil are bad boys!
As for the rhetoric on Iraq and Afghanistan, yes, they do use those terms to describe what is happening (even though in both there is a multi-national coalition - and so far, neither country has been taxed to pay for the American Expense). But we have to be careful about how we describe the situations. Politicians can spout off with 30 second sound bites and come across as fools - because they will never admit they are wrong. We however should strive for accuracy so that no one can come back at us and discredit a valid argument because we are wrong on definitions.
In other words, just because idiots say those things does not mean we have to mimic the idiots.
Wait, whose reply was that in response to? Sorry, it kind of confused me...
im·pe·ri·al·ism
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition OR by the establishment of ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL HEGEMONY over other nations.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/imperialist?qsrc=2446
Territorial acquisition isn't a requirement to be imperialistic...its just a common trend of empires...
Sphere of influence is China telling North Korea "don't be dumb and launch nukes at America"...invading and occupying nations across the globe is not sphere of influence....unless, of course, you consider Iraq and Afghanistan within our "sphere of influence"...
Good call
Yes, in many ways things are better...but you can't just ignore the intentions of the US because the results turn out to be good...take for example the Marshall Plan after WWII...the US helped rebuild non-communist nations, but it wasn't because America is nice and it was "the right thing to do"...the Marshall Plan had the sole purpose of preventing the spread of communism into western Europe...
If Al Capone spares your life because he needs you to break into a bank vault, you might be grateful that you're still alive...but you don't thank him for it...
The Iraqi people are grateful for the removal of Saddam...but the US didn't go into Iraq because it cares about the people there...we went into Iraq because George Bush was ticked at his dad for not kicking Saddam out during Desert Storm...even if you think we went there for oil, terrorists, WMDs, or whatever crap excuse the Bush Administration had people fall for, it wasn't to help the people of Iraq...if America was really into helping people, it would have invested those resources in helping Haiti, or it would have sent those troops to Dharfur...and it would have done so before we even went into Iraq...
America sent in enough troops to find Saddam and set up a government that has elections...if it really cared about the people, it would have sent more troops to limit the devastation of a power vacuum and would have done a better job at protecting civilian infrastructure...America now has a democratic nation that is "in debt" per se to America...oh, it's also in the mid-east, and it borders Iran...coincidence? I think not...Iraq was liberated because of its tactical significance...
Hmm... very good points. What I think, is that there isn't much you can do to stop it. I mean, which country can realistically stand up to America? Even if you had some souped-up Eurasian League, or whatever, then the global economy would go down the drain.
I disagree with a lot of what the American Government does. For example, they fund Israel's opression of Palestine, and argue with me if you want, I don't think that it's fair for the people of Palestine to be mistreated because a religious text says "this is your land." One of the major fuck-ups of my government (Britain) that one was. Anyway, I think that Afghanistan will benefit eventually, because the Taliban will have gone. Unfortunately, yes, America will have them under its thumb.
So, who will usurp America? China won't, and they're the main contenders. M.A.E.D. is my new term. Mutually Assured Economic Destruction. After all, who will China sell all their mass-produced sweatshop goods to if America goes down the pan.
By the way, I hate to be a conspiracist, but does it strike you how well America handled the recovery of the European nation? Think about it, Germany was a hellhole, but was the frontline. Fill it with dollars, and let them pay you back slowly. Britain is the major player in Europe, and possibly third place to the USSR and America with its empire. Demand all the war money back now.
Hmm...
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
